THE KARNATAKA CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSOCIATION®,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

nature, these are clubbed together, heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 2. First, we deal with delay in filing appeals before NFAC. The assessee has raised various grounds of appeals on merit as well as non-admitting of appeals by NFAC on the reason of delay in filing these appeals

THE KARNATAKA CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSOCIATION®,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

nature, these are clubbed together, heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 2. First, we deal with delay in filing appeals before NFAC. The assessee has raised various grounds of appeals on merit as well as non-admitting of appeals by NFAC on the reason of delay in filing these appeals

THE KARNATAKA CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSOCIATION®,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(2)(1) , BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

nature, these are clubbed together, heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 2. First, we deal with delay in filing appeals before NFAC. The assessee has raised various grounds of appeals on merit as well as non-admitting of appeals by NFAC on the reason of delay in filing these appeals

THE KARNATAKA CHEMISTS & DRUGGISTS ASSOCIATION®,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-5(3)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Soundararajan K.

nature, these are clubbed together, heard together and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 2. First, we deal with delay in filing appeals before NFAC. The assessee has raised various grounds of appeals on merit as well as non-admitting of appeals by NFAC on the reason of delay in filing these appeals

BETHALA PETROPACKS PVT LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT LTD.,),BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4) , BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

delay in filing appeal may kindly be condoned and the appeal may be admitted for hearing in the interest of natural justice

BETHALA PETROPACKS PVT LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT LTD.,),BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4) , BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

delay in filing appeal may kindly be condoned and the appeal may be admitted for hearing in the interest of natural justice

BETHALA PETROPACKS PVT LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT LTD.,),BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

delay in filing appeal may kindly be condoned and the appeal may be admitted for hearing in the interest of natural justice

BETHALA PETROPACKS PVT LTD., (FORMERLY KNOWN AS DEEPAK EXTRUSIONS PVT LTD.,),BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX OFFICER, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(4) , BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

delay in filing appeal may kindly be condoned and the appeal may be admitted for hearing in the interest of natural justice

M/S. SJS ENTERPRISES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Prakash Chand Yadavassessment Year:2017-18

condonation of delay and therefore was unjustified in rejecting the appeal. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) was unreasonable and grossly erred by not considering the merits of the case before rejecting the appeal. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that intimation under section 143(1) of the Act [rectification order under section 154 of the Act dated

M/S. S J S ENTERPRISES LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME, CIRCLE-6(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Years: 2018-19

condonation of delay and therefore was unjustified in rejecting the appeal. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) was unreasonable and grossly erred by not considering the merits of the case before rejecting the appeal. 3. The Learned Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, CPC ("Ld. DCIT, CPC") grossly erred by disallowing an amount of INR 24,54,650 in respect of expense

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

condone the delay in filing the present appeal and hear the same on merits of the matter for the advancement of substantial cause of justice. 7. Similar submissions were provided by the assessee in the penalty appeals filed against orders for A.Ys. 2013-14 & 2015-16 to 2016-17 u/s. 271(1)(c) and 271AAB of the act for A.Ys

M/S. RMZ HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojariassessment Year: 2018-19

justice rather than legalise injustice on technicalities. Therefore, when this Tribunal was empowered and capable of removing injustice, in my opinion, the delay in filing the appeals before the CIT(A) has to be condoned and the appeals of the assessee have to be admitted and disposed of on merit. M/s. RMZ Hotels Private Limited, Bangalore Page

SHRI. MARATE VENKATESHKUMAR ,BANGALORE vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(6), HUBLI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Madhumita Royassessment Year: 2017-18

Natural Justice and therefore the impugned order is liable to be set aside, as illegal. 7. The Appellant refers to and rely upon the decisions of the Hon'ble ITAT, Bangalore in the case of SOT/. Teena Bethala Vs. ITO (ITA No- 1383/Rang/2019, dtd 28.08.2019, wherein it was held that: "On reading of section 69A, it is clear that

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

nature, and that, the assessee has not been able to prove with facts and evidence that there was no gross negligence or deliberate inaction or lack of bonafide in filing the appeals belatedly. The Ld.CIT(A) relying on the principle embodied in the dictam “vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt”, held that, the delay cannot be condoned simply because, the assessee

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

nature, and that, the assessee has not been able to prove with facts and evidence that there was no gross negligence or deliberate inaction or lack of bonafide in filing the appeals belatedly. The Ld.CIT(A) relying on the principle embodied in the dictam “vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt”, held that, the delay cannot be condoned simply because, the assessee

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

nature, and that, the assessee has not been able to prove with facts and evidence that there was no gross negligence or deliberate inaction or lack of bonafide in filing the appeals belatedly. The Ld.CIT(A) relying on the principle embodied in the dictam “vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt”, held that, the delay cannot be condoned simply because, the assessee

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

nature, and that, the assessee has not been able to prove with facts and evidence that there was no gross negligence or deliberate inaction or lack of bonafide in filing the appeals belatedly. The Ld.CIT(A) relying on the principle embodied in the dictam “vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt”, held that, the delay cannot be condoned simply because, the assessee

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

nature, and that, the assessee has not been able to prove with facts and evidence that there was no gross negligence or deliberate inaction or lack of bonafide in filing the appeals belatedly. The Ld.CIT(A) relying on the principle embodied in the dictam “vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt”, held that, the delay cannot be condoned simply because, the assessee

K. P. NANJUNDI VISHWAKARMA,BENGALURU vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(2), BENGALURU

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Smt Beena Pillai & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

nature, and that, the assessee has not been able to prove with facts and evidence that there was no gross negligence or deliberate inaction or lack of bonafide in filing the appeals belatedly. The Ld.CIT(A) relying on the principle embodied in the dictam “vigilantibus non dormientibus jura subveniunt”, held that, the delay cannot be condoned simply because, the assessee